Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T01:23:10.666Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control of reproductive and pelt changes in ferrets: some experiments with animals kept entirely upon artificial light

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. Hammond
J. Hammond
Affiliation:
The Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology, Shrewsbury, Mass., and the Physiological Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The effects, on induction and maintenance of oestrus and on pelt changes, were compared for various schedules of entirely artificial light of constant intensity.

A period of exposure to low environmental temperature was without effect on subsequent response to light treatment.

In one experiment, after periods on 6 hr. artificial light or on daylight, groups were put upon, daily, (i) 7 hr. light as 6 hr. + 5 hr. dark + 1 hr. light, (ii) the same total amount of light but divided as 6 hr. + 1 hr. separated by darkness increasing by 5 min. each day, and (iii) light increasing from 7 hr. by 5 min. daily. Groups (ii) and (iii) became oestrous together, later than group (i).

Subsequently all were placed on 7 hr. total light daily, applied in various ways. If given as a single continuous period daily, oestrus ended and moult into winter coat occurred. The latent period depended upon the treatment previously imposed. The duration of oestrus on treatment (i) was greater than normal.

In another experiment females were put on, daily, (iv) 24 hr. light, (v) 14 hr. light, and (vi) 4 hr. light as 2 hr. + 10 hr. dark + 2 hr. light. First response was seen on (vi), but on the average the quickest was on (v) and slowest on (iv). Thus darkness contributes to the induction of oestrus.

Possible interpretations are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , July 1952 , pp. 293 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1952

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bartholomew, G. A. (1949). Bull. Harv. Mus. Comp. Zool. 101.Google Scholar
Benoit, J. (1938). In Les Hormones Sexuelles, ed. by Brouha, L.. Paris.Google Scholar
Bissonnette, T. H. (1932). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 110, 322.Google Scholar
Bissonnette, T. H. (1935). Anal. Rec. 63, 159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bissonnette, T. H. (1936). J. Hered. 27, 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bissonnette, T. H. (1941). Physiol. Zoöl. 14, 379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, J. W. (1939). J. Exp. Zool. 80, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, J. W. (1947). J. Exp. Zool. 105, 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, W. E. Le Gros, McKeown, T. & Zuckerman, S. (1939). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 126, 449.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. Jr. (1951). Nature, Lond., 167, 150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, D. S. (1951). J. Exp. Biol. 28, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, F. H. A. (1940). J. Exp. Biol. 17, 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, F. H. A. & Bowden, F. P. (1936). J. Exp. Biol. 13, 383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pincus, G. & Werthessen, N. T. (1938). Amer. J. Physiol. 124, 484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, A. P. D. & Zuckerman, S. (1948). J. Anat., Lond., 83, 63.Google Scholar
Yeates, N. T. M. (1949). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar